Top 20 heavyweights all time

[Bronson66]

I highly doubt that but who knows, fact is Holyfield battered him. Douglas being out of shape is no one's fault but his own.

I don't think Douglas would have beaten barely any top tier HW's that night. He beat Mike Tyson, that's it. Just because he beat the living day lights out of Mike Tyson doesn't magically mean he'll beat fighters who were vastly better than Mike Tyson.

It doesn't stop there any way, almost every common opponent Holyfield did better. As well as actually battering Tyson himself, which is a decent indicator usually.

I think Douglas that night, would have been a handful for any heavyweight,and that is Oliver McCall's quoted opinion as well.

[IronDanHamza]

I think Douglas that night, would have been a handful for any heavyweight,and that is Oliver McCall's quoted opinion as well.

I know that’s the narrative people like to go with because he managed to beat Mike Tyson from pillar to post but I don’t see it.

But people are entitled to their opinions.

[Willow The Wisp]

I don’t object to your list, but what I find SO ridiculous is that names like Rid**** Bowe or **** Tiger get censored.
If the boxingscene AI pretends to be so keen on not offending anyone, why is it insulting the memory of two great
fighters by refusing to call them by their names?

It sensors the word ***. (J-e-w). Who's that protecting from being offended? Strange.

[Dr. Z]

I highly doubt that but who knows, fact is Holyfield battered him. Douglas being out of shape is no one's fault but his own.

I don't think Douglas would have beaten barely any top tier HW's that night. He beat Mike Tyson, that's it. Just because he beat the living day lights out of Mike Tyson doesn't magically mean he'll beat fighters who were vastly better than Mike Tyson.

It doesn't stop there any way, almost every common opponent Holyfield did better. As well as actually battering Tyson himself, which is a decent indicator usually.

I asked the OP questions, lots of them ( see below ). He has not replied to the yet, or won't defend his reasoning out of fear of hard facts rebuttal to his words. R@ts who he think referred to me, tend to hide. I am here for the debate. It is his thread and these are his thoughts. My questions were to gain insight on his reasoning in his top 20.

I agree with you. Tyson fans, the ones who think Douglas would beat ATG top tier heavyweights are difficult to reason with.

Lot of questions.

Why is Jack Johnson your top five? He lost vs. mature men in Klon***e, Griffin, Choyski, and Hart. He lost to the best person he faced in his lineal title matches in Willard, did not give a title match to the best 3-5 men around ( Langford, Jeannette, McVey, McCarthy, and Smith ) and drew a lot. Yet he is in you top 5? Please explain.

Where would you place Usyk if he retried tomorrow?

Liston's resume of wins lesser than many people that you rate below him and he barley defend his title. So few title defenses and a lower quality of wins, why is he rated this high?

I seldom see Tyson rated above Holyfield who beat him twice. Why do you do it?

[JAB5239]

I asked the OP questions, lots of them ( see below ). He has not replied to the yet, or won't defend his reasoning out of fear of hard facts rebuttal to his words. R@ts who he think referred to me, tend to hide. I am here for the debate. It is his thread and these are his thoughts. My questions were to gain insight on his reasoning in his top 20.

I agree with you. Tyson fans, the ones who think Douglas would beat ATG top tier heavyweights are difficult to reason with.

You're such a turd. You still haven't provided the newspaper article you said you read that had Monxon and Fernandez fighting in December of 1966. Were you lying? Because you were clearly wrong. So until you answer that and post your own top 20 heavyweights you get nothing from me. You're a troll, it's why you were banned from ESB and need to use an alt here. Now get out of my thread. This is for people looking to discuss boxing, not troll.

[QueensburyRules]

I highly doubt that but who knows, fact is Holyfield battered him. Douglas being out of shape is no one's fault but his own.

I don't think Douglas would have beaten barely any top tier HW's that night. He beat Mike Tyson, that's it. Just because he beat the living day lights out of Mike Tyson doesn't magically mean he'll beat fighters who were vastly better than Mike Tyson.

It doesn't stop there any way, almost every common opponent Holyfield did better. As well as actually battering Tyson himself, which is a decent indicator usually.

- - Now Hambone Dan, there U go again. Field butted Tyson open and Tyson reacted poorly to his own blood. Ironically Tubby Lar did much the same to Field, only with his elbow with Field also reacting poorly to scape a decision over the same fighter Tyson laid out for a crucifixion long count.

Tyson was a zombie vs Douglas because he was on strong experimental Psychotropic Meds then to keep him under control. Now they're in widespread use and abuse as counterfeits laced with fentanyl, ect...yupsir...

[BKM-]

Thread is already turning into looney land. Too bad.

[IronDanHamza]

- - Now Hambone Dan, there U go again. Field butted Tyson open and Tyson reacted poorly to his own blood. Ironically Tubby Lar did much the same to Field, only with his elbow with Field also reacting poorly to scape a decision over the same fighter Tyson laid out for a crucifixion long count.

Tyson was a zombie vs Douglas because he was on strong experimental Psychotropic Meds then to keep him under control. Now they're in widespread use and abuse as counterfeits laced with fentanyl, ect...yupsir...

Just typical excuses.

Mike Tyson got absolutely battered and stopped by both Douglas and Holyfield as huge favourites in both.

Get over it.

[Dr. Z]

You're such a turd. You still haven't provided the newspaper article you said you read that had Monxon and Fernandez fighting in December of 1966. Were you lying? Because you were clearly wrong. So until you answer that and post your own top 20 heavyweights you get nothing from me. You're a troll, it's why you were banned from ESB and need to use an alt here. Now get out of my thread. This is for people looking to discuss boxing, not troll.

You won't answer my questions which are directly related to you thread. So be it. CHECKMATE. I take it can not defend you own work. NO MAS you cry.

I never used an alt here. Stop lying, you nose is growing, Cowboy.

BTW, they fought in June 1967. If I got the date mixed up, so what. Why do you keep saying December 1967? That is weak Lot of questions.

Why is Jack Johnson your top five? He lost vs. mature men in Klon***e, Griffin, Choyski, and Hart. He lost to the best person he faced in his lineal title matches in Willard, did not give a title match to the best 3-5 men around ( Langford, Jeannette, McVey, McCarthy, and Smith ) and drew a lot. Yet he is in you top 5? Please explain.

Where would you place Usyk if he retried tomorrow?

Liston's resume of wins lesser than many people that you rate below him and he barley defend his title. So few title defenses and a lower quality of wins, why is he rated this high?

I seldom see Tyson rated above Holyfield who beat him twice. Why do you do it?


This question has been reposted if you have the stones to answer it

[JAB5239]

You won't answer my questions which are directly related to you thread. So be it. CHECKMATE. I take it can not defend you own work. NO MAS you cry.

I never used an alt here. Stop lying, you nose is growing, Cowboy.

BTW, they fought in June 1967. If I got the date mixed up, so what. Why do you keep saying December 1967? That is weak Lot of questions.

You said you read it in an Argentinian newspaper and it was Dec 1966. You got called out on it several times but chose to ignore it. I know you were wrong, you often are.